Dimensions and Entities

[baudrunner]

infinity said,

A truly probabilistic atom wouldn't create spectral lines.

The fundamental creations are the progressive series of a crystaline-like geodesic orb of spatial girders - shrinking, as the webs between those girders grow. Permanence is to existence as infinity is to will, but as energy is created so it is consumed, so the will will always only ever approach infinity, as with existence. Energy is required to know this. Thus is the evolution of things. Adaptation means no more than meeting the challenge to remain.

Naturally, atoms will most certainly exhibit spectral lines. That is the foundation on which quantum reality has been experimentally substantiated. The lines represent the visual result of event thresholds.

[dleviwing]

Hi baud;
I don’t think infinity has posted in quite some time so you may just be talking to thin air.

I was under the impression that the foundation on which quantum reality was substantiated on is Planck’s constant or hf. It seems like everything that can be influenced in discrete units these days are called quantum something or other.

[baudrunner]

Dave,

Yah, no kidding! Professor Quantum, tonight, August 15, 2008, on Larry King Live!

Actually, the term "quanta" was coined by Max Planck to describe the pulses of the blackbody resonator's wavelengths which he detected as occurring in discrete packets, or "quanta", of energy.

Einstein noted that the oscillating character of those wavelengths, whose frequencies were dependent on the cavity resonator's dimensions, must needs allow for absorption of the energies to maintain the oscillations, ponderable as a sine wave, and he termed the packets "photons". Physics is no less competitive in the real world than in the schools.

In any event, Planck's observations led to the development of Quantum Physics, and it is merely a study which seeks to understand reality (!).

The event threshold of the black hole is quantifiable because its place has dependencies. It is transitional, and defines another quantum threshold.

[dleviwing]

Professor Quantum, tonight, August 15, 2008, on Larry King Live!

Thanks; I’ll have to check it out.

BTW: Who’s Professor Quantum?

[PoPpAScience]

PD;
Let me present a few facts about Einstein’s Relativity. First of all it is indeed solely based on measured quantities so you are quite wrong in stating that it is not. It is a subjective methodology of measure that predicts how observers in different reference frames (states of motion) will perceive the same event. This is the premise of “Special Relativity” and it is represented by non-linear mathematical geometry. “General Relativity” presents mass as a further distortion of this non-linear geometry math.

Proper time and space are invariant terms; this means that they are coordinate independent. This is Newtonian or classical interpretation. We do not have and have never been able to produce a device that can produce such an absolute universal reference frame and thus the term “RELATIVE”.

Unfortunately there are real physical behaviors of matter that are often presented as being caused or predicted by relativity. Dilation of “time” and “length” are actually two-fold processes; one is the subjective view based on the observers state of motion and the other is actual variance of the physical properties of the measuring devices due to the motion of the devices relative to a real absolute reference. (clocks and meter sticks) This simply means that the clock actually does slow down and the meter stick actually does reduce it’s length. Relativity predicts only a length change in the direction of the moving object but in reality the volume of the object changes. The problem is that over the years the subjective aspect of Relativity has been merged with the objective aspect of reality and presented as a single aspect of nature.

If you keep the two aspects of Relativity separate, you won’t confuse yourself or allow others to do it for you. The mathematics of Relativity can be used to represent the subjective variance due to moving reference frames or it can be used to represent the objective variance due to physical motion; uniform motion condenses matter. (experimentally shown in accelerator experiments)

Dave;

There is a lot of talk lately about "Relativity", and I find this post as hitting the point just nicely. The rest of this thread is also a great read for the discussion on "Dimensions" that is going on in a lot of threads.

I wrote this in a post earlier in this thread:
When I google Torons I get links that I can not enter with out playing money, but they have quotes like these:
These super potentials can be interpreted as generated by toron configurations.
The dynamical role of torons in M-theory.
These are not the same Torons you are talking about are they?

Dave, I think it would be nice if you would start a thread called "Relativity" for us to reference, and send those that are confused.

[dleviwing]

My use of the word “toron” was long before it became part of M-theory; March 1968 to be more exact. I’ve repeated myself many times on ToeQuest but find it difficult to overcome all the false evidence contributed to Relativity.

Very few on ToeQuest realize the importance of seeing that science is a methodology based purely on our ability to perform measure and need to separate the methodology from the physical reality. Too many allow the math to dictate their view of reality.

You picked one of my better posts; THANKS

[Max™]

I would like you to start a thread on Relativity to use as a reference as well, actually.

Curious to see how that would turn out.